SynthesisAmerican journal of human biology : the official journal of the Human Biology Council2017
Assortative mating for human height: A meta-analysis.
Synthesis in American journal of human biology : the official journal of the Human Biology Council, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
36 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Evidence of correlations between human partners based on systematic reviews and meta-analyses of 22 traits and UK Biobank analysis of 133 traits.Nature human behaviour · 2023Pooled it
- Overcoming attenuation bias in regressions using polygenic indices.Nature communications · 2023Pooled it
- Assortative mating for human height: A meta-analysis.American journal of human biology : the official journal of the Human Biology Council · 2017Pooled it
- Population-Level Implications of Parental Similarity for the Prevalence and Heritability of Psychiatric Disorders.JAMA psychiatry · 2026Article
- Measuring sexual dimorphism in human faces.Journal of anatomy · 2026Article
- The effect of long-range linkage disequilibrium on allele-frequency dynamics under stabilizing selection.PLoS genetics · 2026Article
- Experimental evidence that penis size, height, and body shape influence assessment of male sexual attractiveness and fighting ability in humans.PLoS biology · 2026Article
- A comparison of partner resemblance trends across putative same-sex and opposite-sex couples in the UK biobank.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Standing tall or falling short: A narrative review of height dissatisfaction and psychological outcomes.PLOS mental health · 2025Review
- Interpreting population- and family-based genome-wide association studies in the presence of confounding.PLoS biology · 2024Article
- Partners in Health: Investigating Social Genetic Effects Among Married and Cohabiting Couples.Behavior genetics · 2023Article
- Evaluation of the MC3R gene pertaining to body weight and height regulation and puberty development.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Partner choice, confounding and trait convergence all contribute to phenotypic partner similarity.Nature human behaviour · 2023Article
- Interpreting population and family-based genome-wide association studies in the presence of confounding.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
- Human height: a model common complex trait.Annals of human biology · 2023Review
- Consistency of Eye Coloration Across Different Relationship Partners.Archives of sexual behavior · 2023Article
- Assortative mating on blood type: Evidence from one million Chinese pregnancies.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
- Body height among adult male and female Swiss Health Survey participants in 2017: Trends by birth years and associations with self-reported health status and life satisfaction.Preventive medicine reports · 2022Article
- Genetic assortative mating for schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe study of assortative mating for height has a rich history in human biology. Although the positive correlation between the stature of spouses has often been noted in western populations, recent papers suggest that mating patterns for stature are not universal. The objective of this paper was to review the published evidence to examine the strength of and universality in assortative mating for height.
methodsWe conducted an extensive literature review and meta-analysis. We started with published reviews but also searched through secondary databases. Our search led to 154 correlations of height between partners. We classified the populations as western and non-western based on geography. These correlations were then analyzed via meta-analytic techniques.
results148 of the correlations for partner heights were positive and the overall analysis indicates moderate positive assortative mating (r = .23). Although assortative mating was slightly stronger in countries that can be described as western compared to non-western, this difference was not statistically significant. We found no evidence for a change in assortative mating for height over time. There was substantial residual heterogeneity in effect sizes and this heterogeneity was most pronounced in western countries.
conclusionsPositive assortative mating for height exists in human populations, but is modest in magnitude suggesting that height is not a major factor in mate choice. Future research is necessary to understand the underlying causes of the large amount of heterogeneity observed in the degree of assortative mating across human populations, which may stem from a combination of methodological and ecological differences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.